SAHINA PARVEEN Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MADHYAMIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Senior Advocate, Sri Ashok Khare regarding maintainability of this petition on the ground that the petitioner is not the affected party, therefore, the petitioner cannot challenge the order passed by her superiors.

(2.) My attention was brought to the fact that the petitioner aggrieved by an order dated 18.1.2002, whereby the transfer order of the opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 were cancelled, has filed Writ Petition No. 4799 of 2002. The said writ petition was finally disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Director of Education, who shall decide the representation within a period of three months. The Director, in compliance of the directions of this Court, considered the matter and rejected the representation by an order dated 23.5.2002 upholding the cancellation of the transfer order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) From the perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the documents furnished by the petitioner were also taken into consideration while deciding the matter. In fact, the representation of the petitioner has been decided by the Director of Education in compliance of the directions issued in Writ Petition No. 4799 of 2002 filed by the petitioner challenging the cancellation of transfer Order, therefore, it can be said that the petitioner is aggrieved party because it is his representation which has been decided by impugned order dated 23.5.2002. Accordingly, this petition filed by the petitioner is maintainable.